Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Big Books, Autolearn and cooked lines from human point of view

Author: Fernando Villegas

Date: 11:54:36 12/28/97


Hi Chris, Thorsten, Robert and the rest of people discussing this:
There is, maybe, a different and complementary side to judge all this
matter about book cooking, auto learn ad anything that means an enormous
amount of opening knowledge and very long lines of instant moves before
the engine begin to compute. Before, let me tell you that nothing of the
stuff I am going to say means that other visions are wrong. I don't want
to polemize with nobody, not to say something is unmoral or not, fair or
not. I suppose the commercial problem that could arise from deceiving
ratings can be coped with more information for the customers, and even I
presume the market of this kind of chess software is already well
acquainted with the fact of the relative value of Elo list made out by
SSDF people. What I want to put here is how this is or could bee seen
from the side of us, human beings, and specially professional customer,
that is to say, people that use chess programs not only to get fun, but
to learn and improve his game. And as much as M7 is precisely a kind of
software that is very fitted to that people, I think that the following
remarks are appropriate.
a) You don’t play a computer, you play against moves made by a computer.
This is not a triffling, silly distinction: if you focus attention in
the board and not in the computer at the other side of it, then is not
important if the moves were stocked or have been calculated  just now:
the point is to get moves to which you must respond with the better move
you can get from you,  calculated or also remembered from a previous
theoretical knowledge.
b) If the lines the computer play are sound and you are defeated because
of them, it does not matter if the computer just “remembered” them or
calculated them; in any case it has been a tool for you to see your
mistakes and learn a new, better way to play that line.
c) If the line played by the computer is wrong and you defeat it because
of that, the computer will not repeat it again and so you and your
teacher have learned something for a better and more challenging game,
later.
d) If you get out of the theoretical or cooked line very soon because
you are creative or just because you played badly or/and you did not
remember the best line, then you will begin to play at once against the
engine and so the “problem”, if that’s the problem,  disappear at once.
e) If in any case you just don’t like to play against a computer that
does not appear computing very soon, you are always with the right and
chance to challenge the program with something new and this is, also, a
great way to improve.
So, ¿where is the problem FROM the point of view of the customer and
user?
Non...
For us the program is a tool because he calculates very well or because
he has a perfect memory, not because he seems to be a partner on the
club, thinking and perspiring. In any case, the computer thinking or
just remembering,  you play against good or bad moves to refute, in any
case you learn, in any case you get a challenge. What a hell matter to
you if the computer proceedings are thorough calculation or just
reproduction? For the same reason I think nobody will be upset because
of the perfect ending database, where all is pre calculated. In fact,
for me, a lazy player with very little knowledge of openings and
endings, to be defeated in that stages of the game for a computer that
does not think at all because he "knows", is a lot better than to play
against a 1980 vintage computer that does not know how to punish my
mistakes in the technical stages of the game and so give me a break.
Even more, if I can win my shortcomings will not appear, giving to me a
deceiving high impression of my play. In fact, many of us were deceived
in that way with the first and second generation of chess programs.  It
has been only with programs gifted with very big books -and now endings
tables- that I have realized the great gaps of my game. And of course
how the computer got his knowledge, if thorough programming, autolearn
or cooked lines against other programs, I don’t care a shit.



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.